Muldrow v. Surrex: On Remand Following Brinker, Court of Appeal Again Affirms Judgment for Employer, and Supreme Court Denies Depublication Request

The California Supreme Court meets each week to act on cases and publishes its actions on its web site (here) on Thursday mornings. This week, the Court denied a request for depublication in Muldrow v. Surrex Corporation (8/29/12) 208 Cal. App. 4th 1381. I did not catch the Court of Appeal decision when it came down, so here it is:  

In Muldrow v. Surrex Solutions Corporation (1/24/12) 202 Cal.App.4th 1232 (discussed here), a recruiter sued his employer for failure to pay overtime and meal period compensation. The trial court certified the class and, after a bench trial, found: (1) the class members were subject to the commissioned employees exemption from the overtime requirements; (2) the employer provided meal periods to them, and (3) it was not obligated to ensure that they took their meal periods. The Court of Appeal affirmed, and the Supreme Court issued a grant-and-hold order pending Brinker.  On remand after Brinker, the Court of Appeal once again affirmed the judgment, holding: 

1. Brinker had no impact on the Court's analysis of the overtime exemption for commissioned employees, and the trial court correctly held that the employees were subject to the exemption. 
2. The trial court did not err “in ruling that [the employer] was not obligated to ensure that meal period[s] were taken." Citing Brinker, 53 Cal.4th at p. 1040. 

The opinion is available here. 

As I mentioned above, the California Supreme Court on January 3 denied a request for depublication filed by the Brinker plaintiffs. The Muldrow plaintiffs apparently did not file a petition for review.